The Instigator
tasir
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
wiploc
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points

should weapons stronger than a standard handgun be available to the public

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
wiploc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/1/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 632 times Debate No: 29779
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

tasir

Con

DO WE TRULY NEED ANYTHING STRONGER THAN A STANDARD HANDGUN? WE ARE YTHE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS FOR SELF DEFENSE IF NO GUNS ARE STRONGER THAN A Standard 22 pistol (I apologize for the above text being all caps I didn't realize it and don't feel like retyping)why would we need weapons like assault rifles assault ≠ self . based on that logic a handgun is all that's needed to defend you and your family members
wiploc

Pro

Note: Con has BoP.

WE ARE YTHE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS FOR SELF DEFENSE

No, it's so we can be an effective militia.

IF NO GUNS ARE STRONGER THAN A Standard 22 pistol why would we need weapons like assault rifles assault ≠ self .

Rifles aim better. .357 stops dogs, cougars, and bears way better. .22 isn't a combat round.

based on that logic a handgun is all that's needed to defend

No, you left out premises and begged questions. Your form is invalid.

Wow, 500 character limit is short.




Debate Round No. 1
tasir

Con

but we do not need to possess these weapons security checks and insanity checks to get your right to bear arms are never perfect for example if a 20 year old buys a powerful weapon who is to say he wont go insane three years later mental illnesses usually show up in late teen early adulthood so it can happen anytime

.22 isn't a combat round.
why would we need a combat round for SELF DEFENSE what else would you need a weapon for?
combat≠ defense
wiploc

Pro

Your background checks argument is off topic.

Gun magazine (I forget which) editors said it's hard to find a .22 pistol both accurate and reliable. Without accuracy, reliability, and stopping power, .22 pistols are insufficient for combat (defense). There is simply nothing to be said in their favor.

You dropped the point that rifles are easier to hit the target with.

-

Con (not me) has the burden of proof. He has not met that burden.

Vote Pro (I'm Pro, even though I went second).

Debate Round No. 2
tasir

Con

tasir forfeited this round.
wiploc

Pro

Round 1: He asked questions, misrepresented Constitution, made no relevant assertions.

Round 2: Another question. A claim that self-defence isn't combat. Plus some gibberish.

Round 3: He forfeited.

He never even tried to meet his burden of proof.

---

Please vote Pro. I am Pro, even though I went second.

Also, please vote me S&G points because he was so sloppy as to be hard to read.


Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
tasirwiplocTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Nice short debate (except for the fact that con F.F., instead of conceding). tasir did not fulfil BOP, & dropped pro's arguments.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
tasirwiplocTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Most of Con's arguments didn't make much sense. "NO GUNS ARE STRONGER THAN A Standard 22 pistol." What the?! .32, .38, 9mm, .357, and .45 are all stronger and are proven to stop an attacker with more certainty and in less time, besides rifles and shotguns. (arguments). "I didn't realize it and don't feel like retyping" - I accept your apology, but must grant S&G to your opponent (s&g). Con forfeited the final round (conduct).
Vote Placed by morgan2252 4 years ago
morgan2252
tasirwiplocTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to pro because of FF. S&G to pro because con has poor spelling and grammar. Arguments to pro because he does an overall better job of of arguing his case. Sources are even.